Delhi Court October 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Smt Mehar Jahan and ors. Vs. Abdul Wahid and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:29. h October, 2013 % + MAC.APP. 259/2012 & CM No.5024/2013 SMT MEHAR JAHAN & ORS. Represented by: ..... Appellants Mr.O.P.Mannie, Advocate. Versus ABDUL WAHID & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Shoumik Mazumdar, Advocate for Respondent No.3/Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 259/2012 1. Vide the present appeal, the appellants are assailing the judgment dated 13.12.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.9,24,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation as noted above and argued that the deceased was the Sole Proprietor of A-One Electroplating and the claimants have proved his income by placing on record the Income Tax Re...
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Seema Chopra and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:29. h October, 2013 % + MAC.APP. 819/2011 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus SEEMA CHOPRA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 819/2011 1. The instant appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 25.07.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation as under: Treatment expenses: Loss of dependency: Funeral Expenses : Love & Affection : Loss of Consortium: TOTAL: Interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum was also awarded on the total compensation amount from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued that deceased Sanjay Chopra died on 08.06.2010 pursuant to injuries received in the accident occurred ...
Upsc Vs. Sushil Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:29. 10.2013 + WP(C) No.1673 of 2011 UPSC Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Adv. versus SUSHIL KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(ORAL) The respondent before this court sought the following information from the petitioner:1. What were the minimum criteria defined for the shot listing of the candidates for calling them for interview in case of the candidate is having B. Tech (Computer Science)/MCA degree?.2. What were the various norms followed for differentiating among the candidates while short listing them, which are having different qualification as per Educational Qualification prescribed in Point A, B, C and D?. These qualifications were advertised in as the different educational qualification and were required with different number of years of experience.3. What were the minimum criteria for short-listing the candidates for interview in case of educationa...
Braham Prakash Dhikia Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:29. 10.2013 + BAIL APPLN. 2002/2013 BRAHAM PRAKASH DHIKIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Ramesh Gupta, Sr.Advocate along with Ms.Nandita Abrol, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Satish Kumar Verma, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. This is an application u/s 439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail in FIR No.278/2013 Police Station Nand Nagri u/s 302/120-B/34 IPC and 25 of Arms Act.2. As per the case of the prosecution, the aforesaid FIR was registered in pursuance to a PCR call recorded vide D.D.No.5-A dated 1.6.2013 in Police Station Nand Nagri that a person has been shot at in front of market of A-4, Nand Nagri, Budh Vihar Dharamshala. Upon receipt of the said information, SI Nitin along with Constable Charan Pal had gone to the spot where it was revealed that injured had been shifted to SDN Hospital. Thereafter the police reached the said hospital and MLC of injured Kanwar Pal Singh was obt...
FayyazuddIn and anr. Vs. Delhi Waqf Board and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + REW. PET. 690/2012 in CM(M) 591/2012 Date of Decision:29. 10.2013 FAYYAZUDDIN AND ANR. ...PETITIONERS Through: Mr.S.D.Ansari, Mr.I.Ahmed, Advocates. Versus ...RESPONDENTS DELHI WAQF BOARD & ANR. Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J.1. This review petition under Order 47 read with Section 151 CPC is filed by the petitioners seeking review of the order dated 29.08.2012, whereby CM(M) 591/2012 filed by them against the order dated 7.2.2012 of Addl. District Judge-cum-Waqf Tribunal, New Delhi passed in suit No.45/2009, was dismissed.2. The instant review petition is filed stating that some of the points submitted by the petitioners have not been considered while passing the said order dated 29.08.2012 by this court. It is submitted that the points which have not been considered are thus:1. The petitioners being the Muslims, are the beneficiary of the Waqf property, and thus, could not be evicted therefrom.2. The petition...
Bhupender Singh Bhalla Vs. Neelu Bhalla @ Neelam Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + I.A.21072/2012, I.A. 5885/2013 & I.A. 1992/2013 in CS(OS) 2828/2012 Date of Decision:29. 10.2013 BHUPENDER SINGH BHALLA Through: ...PLAINTIFF Mr. Achal Gupta, Adv. Versus NEELU BHALLA @ NEELAM SINGH Through: ...DEFENDANT Mr. N.N. Aggarwal, Mr. Rohit Gandhi, Mr. Varun Garg and Mr. Manpreet Kaur, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J.1. The above listed three applications are being disposed by this order. The plaintiff filed I.A. 5885/2013 Under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC praying for a decree against the defendant in terms of prayers (a), (b) and (e) of the plaint. The defendant filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of plaint under clauses (b) and (c) of Order 7 Rule 11 CPC stating that the suit is grossly undervalued and the requisite court fees has not been paid as per Court Fees (Delhi Amendment) Act, 2012. Another application being I.A. 1992/2012 is filed by the defendant under Sections 33, 35 and 38 of I...
Shakti Vahini Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
$~14. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 444/2013. SHAKTI VAHINI Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Ashok K. Singh, Adv. with Mr.Ravi Kant, President of petitioner NGO. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Dayan Krishnan, Addl. Standing counsel for the State with Ms.Manvi Priya, Adv. Mr.S.B.K. Singh, Jt.C.P./Crime, Mr.Kumar Gyanesh, DCP/Crime and Mr.V.K. Dham, ACP/Crime. Mr.R.N. Vats, Mr.Nishant Sharma and Ms.Madhu Saini, Advs. for respondent no.3 along with respondent no.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI ORDER2910.2013 % CRL.M.A.14181/2013 1. Application stands dismissed as not pressed. W.P.(CRL) 444/2013.2. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, which is an NGO, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., inter alia, praying that investigation be conducted by an independent Government agency along with a senior officer of Deputy Commissioner of Police level from Crime Branch, Delhi ...
Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS (OS) 267/2002 Date of Decision:29. 10.2013 VINEETA SHARMA ...PLAINTIFF Through: Mr.K.K.Bhuchar, Advocate. Versus ...DEFENDANTS RAKESH SHARMA AND ORS. Through: Mr. Subhasish Mohanty, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J.1. The plaintiff has filed this suit for partition against her brothers and mother in respect of built up premises A-53, South Extension, Part II, New Delhi.2. The undisputed facts are that the suit premises was purchased and built up by the plaintiffs father, wherein he along with his family stayed for some time and also let out a portion thereof to the tenants. He died on 11.12.1999, leaving behind the plaintiff and three sons namely the defendants No.1, 2, Dr. Shailendra Sharma (since deceased) and wife (defendant No.3). Dr. Shailendra Sharma also expired on 01.07.2001. The plaintiffs case is that since her father and brother died intestate, she is entitled to one-fourth share in the suit premises. Sh...
Om Parkash Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:29. h October, 2013 + W.P.(C) 10802/2005 OM PARKASH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Neeraj Dev Gaur, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Mr. R.V. Sinha with Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates for Respondent No.1/UOI. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak with Mr. Praneet Singh, Advocates for Respondent No.2. Ms. Shobhana Takiar with Ms. Ritagya Riti, Advocates for Respondent DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G.P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to allot an alternative plot of land measuring 400 sq. yds in Dwarka on the ground that his father Late Harchand was owner of 25 bigha and 8 biswas of land falling in revenue estate of Village Jasola. A Notification No.4(9)/64-L&H dated 06.04.1964 under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act) was issued by the Government of Delhi for acquisition of certain lands for planned development of Delhi. This was followed by ...
Kamal Bhushan Bhatnagar Vs. Ramwati
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: October 29, 2013 + RC.REV. 504/2012 & CM No.17395/2012 KAMAL BHUSHAN BHATNAGAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr.J.C. Mahindro, Adv. versus RAMWATI Through ..... Respondent Mr.Saurabh Jain, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition is contested by the petitioner under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act,1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the impugned order dated 11th July, 2012 passed in eviction petition No.E-01/2012 by the Court of ARC, Rohini, Delhi.2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent/landlady filed an eviction petition against the petitioner/tenant under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act on the ground of bonafide requirement of the property bearing No.B3/264, Sector 6, Rohini, Delhi-110085 (hereinafter referred to as the tenanted premises). It was stated in the eviction petition that the respondent is the owner of the tenanted premises...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »